User talk:DaneKHoward/sandbox2

Peer review
I think you made a very good table incorporation, all the most important information is there and easy to find, and it seems very complete. it also fits nicely beside the plot section. I also like the order of organization, with plot first, then production, then, now that we know something about the characters, cast. I think that order settles well into how someone would research a movie (start with plot and narrow down). Nothing seems off topic here, though I would say more information on the production of the film itself is warranted, though the director's history is interesting. It's perfectly neutral in voice, though I recommend adding a reception section so we can get the audience's voice in there. That said, the article needs to be sourced. None of the claims are linked to any one source, and therefore it's difficult to check for accuracy and reliability. That should be priority #1 in my opinion, otherwise everything you wrote might get taken down by an admin until citations are provided. I really do like your table though, and I think I should try to make mine as comprehensive as yours if I can. Renegadeknight3 (talk)

Peer Review
Hi! Your article is looking good so far. The Lead is done well, and every that follows is orderly. I've never seen the movie, but I think you did a good job with the plot! I think there should be a part for the reception to show just how well (or not) it did, as well as some reviews from well known sources. Most importantly, you do have references as the bottom, but none of them are attached to anything in the article, which makes it difficult to check for credibility/reliability. That's the biggest thing to improve upon in this. But other than those two things, it's looking good so far. Jbalbz (talk) 14:33, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Almost
Citations/references needs some work. More polishing: links, images, prose. Profhanley (talk)